| 0 |
Subject: Urgent Baseball Rule Clarification Please Read
Posted by: nerveclinic
- [105222] Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 06:50
I put this in the baseball thread but was afraid some might not see it.
I am making this point because I sincerely remember this is the rule, and after going back and researching I still think I am right.
Since I provide evidence below I am correct, I would ask the same of anyone challenging my interpretation of the rule.
I say urgent because I am close to making a waiver selection.
I still challenge the rule that we cannot pick up a prospect before Thursday as long as he was part of the original draft day database.
I actually went back through all the rules and as late as 2006 found this in the rules Madman wrote up for us.
j) Prior Rule. Until the Prospect Draft is concluded, no prospect that was ineligible for the regular draft can be acquired by any team.
That's exactly how I remember it. Was there a rule change?
As long as the player was part of the yahoo draft he is eligible to be picked up.
Someone show me a different rule, I can't find it.
The reason we "moved up the draft" was so that new prospects that got added during the season couldn't be added to rosters. It was too confusing to keep track of the newbies, but the originals were always allowed to be added. That is what rule J The Prior rule states.
Someone please show me were this rule was changed or I am reserving the right to draft a prospect that was in the original draft as I believe that is the correct rule.
Honestly if I am mistaken I apologize but I can't find anything in the rules discussion to make me believe I am wrong.
Wasn't the issue with Prior that he was added to the database between the original draft and the prospect draft?
2006 madman rules list
|
| 1 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 07:10
|
Whatever MM's interprtaion of the rules in 2005 (that's the first time I've seen that) I know we've had to put players back because they were prospect eligible and picked up before the prospect draft.
The idea that you could pick up prosepct eliglble players during the prospect draft to "skip a turn" seems silly to me, anyway
|
| 2 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 07:17
|
If your intrepretaion of the rules is correct, please show me the rule that would prevent me from:
1. Picking up a prospect eligible, undrafted player from Yahoo! data base off waivers;
2. Hold him 'till it's my prosect draft turn'
3. releasing him, and
4. Draft him as a prospect.
Also, FWIW, according to MM's rules bilruben, not MITH is up in the draft. LOL
|
| 3 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 07:19
|
I know we've had to put players back because they were prospect eligible and picked up before the prospect draft.
Yes of course we have, that would be prospects that weren't part of the original draft so yes I agree this is true. It doesn't alter the rule noted above.
The idea that you could pick up prosepct eliglble players during the prospect draft to "skip a turn" seems silly to me, anyway
That's not what I am saying, this would have to take place before the prospect draft, but a waiver pick will kick in before Thursday morning. If we start the draft before then, like today, then so be it, the player wouldn't be eligible. I suppose if PD speeds up the draft to today it will; make all this discussion mute.
The point wouldn't be to "skip a turn" it would be for the same reason Bucholz was drafted in the regular draft, to add the player to your team.
|
| 4 | Mattinglyinthehall
Dude
ID: 01629107
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 07:51
|
The only reference I can find to a rule that prohibits the free agent and waiver pickups of prospect eligible players is in post 1 of this thread from 2004 where Toral wrote the following:I think we have to axe the rule that says that no-one who is prospect-list eligible can be picked up between the main draft and the prospect draft, unl;ess he was Yahoo!-listed at the time of the end of the draft (I think that's the rule -- I'm not even sure I remember it correctly.).
|
| 5 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:11
|
MITH your post just re-enforces my point. Toral restates what I am saying above and further rule J in Madman's list also restates it.
Toral unl;ess he was Yahoo!-listed at the time of the end of the draft
Exactly what I am claiming the rule has always been.
|
| 6 | Boldwin
ID: 3013265
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:21
|
Re: post#2
I thot that having been on a regular roster ever, makes him inelegeble for prospect keeper status.
'not a lawyer, don't play one on TV'
|
| 7 | Myboyjack
ID: 27210710
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:26
|
no - to the degree that was true, we changed that at one time - however, my main point was that relying, as nerve wants to, on what MM wrote, is not a good idea. There's nothing that nerve has pointed to that would prevent that; and nerve's interpretation would encourage it.
|
| 8 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:40
|
MBJ Post 2, So you are saying the manager who drafted bucholz can drop him during the prospect draft and add him to his prospect bench? I don't think so.
How is my example any different then the prospects that were drafted from the database a few days ago?
If your point is valid, then there are lots of prospects people drafted who they can now add to their prospect bench during the draft. That's absurd.
I'm simply asking the rules be followed as they've always been, both MM list of rules and the MITH post seem to imply in this case my memory was correct.
I'm willing to be shown my points are wrong, but so far everything in writing supports my thesis.
|
| 9 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:42
|
By the way MBJ my intention would not be to do what you are suggesting, it would be to add the player to my 2008 roster.
|
| 10 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:44
|
Also, FWIW, according to MM's rules bilruben, not MITH is up in the draft. LOL
Yeah I thought that at least one year we did reverse order.
|
| 11 | Mattinglyinthehall
Dude
ID: 01629107
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:46
|
Nerve
the manager who drafted bucholz can drop him during the prospect draft and add him to his prospect bench?
I most certainly can, unless you made a rule to prevent it in 2007. Or I could pick up a prospect-eligible player as a free agent and then hold him until it's time for my last pick in the prospect draft and drop him the moment before I select him as a prospect.
We've discussed that "hanky-panky" at length, proposed numerous rules in attempt to prevent it and to my memory the one that passed was the one that said we would have the prospect draft right after the primary draft. Which is why I don't understand this two-day gap between the two drafts in which we have access to our teams.
|
| 12 | Myboyjack
ID: 27210710
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:47
|
I understand that nerve. I believe I'm right about the rule; however, my main hope would be that by the end of this thread, we all know exactly what the rule is. You've gone to the trouble of asking for a clarification; the rest of the league owes you/it a clear answer.
|
| 13 | Myboyjack
ID: 27210710
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:49
|
MITH - 11. I agree. I don't understand why the draft wasn't commenced immediately. You should start a thread, make your pick and let's get on with it. There's nothing to set up and there is no clock so I don't see what possible complaint there could be.
|
| 14 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 08:57
|
MITH if you had posted more of Toral's post it would have even further proven my point...
The reason is that the rule is a big pain in the ass. Everybody has to remind themselves of the rule at the beginning of the year; 2 years ago, bili had kept a spreadsheet listing all players who had been eligible at draft time, last year no-one did, and (IIRC) RFS had to go looking for one and we eventually codged such a list from Gurupie J, people pick up players and someone has to go slogging through the Yahoo! player-addition pages to confirm when he was added (IIRC, only RFS, bili and me have been willing to check this stuff, sorry if I forgot anyone.)
The rule change necessary to solve this would simply say that anyone not on a prospect keeper list can be picked up.
Oh yes -- the reason for the rule. Well, go back to Mark Prior. He was not Yahoo! listed at draft time, so bili couldn't pick him up; he was not eligible to be picked up until the prospect draft. Why? Well, if we didn't do it this way, the guy getting Prior would have been the first guy to notice he had been added to Yahoo!. Doesn't bother me; I can get up at 3 AM Eatern (when Yahoo! adds players.) But it was felt that his rights ought to be determined in some sort of draft order.
So unless the premise of this post above chnged it's further evidence I'm correct because I couldn't find any changes in the rules thread.
If you want to rush the draft, go for it, but I thought the point of moving the draft up was to save the headache of figuring out if a prospect was in the original database, not to prevent a manager from picking a legitimate player off waivers.
|
| 15 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 09:00
|
As far as adding Bucholz to your prospect list, he was part of my roster last year and played for my team, I thought that prevents him from ever being a prospect again...or a I confused about that? Highly possible I am.
If someone adds a prospect that they drafted in the regular draft, to their prospect bench...that would be a first.
|
| 16 | Mattinglyinthehall
Dude
ID: 01629107
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 09:05
|
Maybe you're right about the reason for it. I don't know.
This will be the last time I complain about ruules this preseason - I promise:
It's very backward that we encourage the taking (throught waivers and free agency) of prospect eligible players prior to the start of the prospect draft but also exclude players not listed in Yahoo from the primary draft in the name of protecting prospect-elibible players from being scooped up before the prospect draft.
zzzzip
|
| 17 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 09:21
|
in the name of protecting prospect-eligible players from being scooped up before the prospect draft.
Well I am one of the managers who has always been against being allowed to pick any player in the universe, and I am more then willing to listen to all sides of the argument again this year and vote. My reason for being against is not the point you made above.
We are playing Yahoo baseball. We happen to be drafting off line. Were we drafting on line we could only pick up players in the database.
I just think we should use the database provided by the game we are using.
If you want to start a change of rule thread and make strong arguments for changing it I would definitely look at the points with an open mind. Maybe it's time we debate it again.
zzzip
|
| 18 | Mattinglyinthehall
Dude
ID: 01629107
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 09:21
|
Nerve I don't recall any rule that disqualifies players from the prospect draft if they have ever been on a manager's primary or prospect roster in the past. In fact we've had many discussions about how to prevent the practice I described in post 11. If all formerly owned players are ineligible for the prospect draft, the described practice would be illegal under such a rule and would never have been an issue.
|
| 19 | Mattinglyinthehall
Dude
ID: 01629107
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 09:22
|
If you want to start a change of rule thread
Nope. I'm zzzipped.
|
| 20 | Perm Dude
ID: 9211197
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 09:58
|
#15: We made a rule change for prospects, that their inclusion on a regular season roster was no longer a cause for them to be ineligible to be a prospect anymore. This prevented a manager from "soiling" prospects by picking them up late in the year. It also became a headache trying to figure out whether a particular prospect has been on someone's regular roster at any time.
So long as a player meets the other requirements, they are still a prospect.
As for the question of the thread, nerve is right, I think, in the interpretation. However, this gives me a vague sense of unease about the whole thing. Nerve asked for a couple of days to do research. Now that there is a gap between drafts he's asking about how to take advantage of it--a gap which only exists because he asked for it for research purposes. There is this underhanded feel to the whole thing I'm getting, as though the short gap in time was asked for in order to take advantage of a loophole we tried to close by doing the drafts back-to-back.
While it is allowable in the rules, it is clear (to me, anyway) that it has been the intention of the league to do away with that loophole. While we can come up with a specific rule banning the picking up of prospects before the prospect draft (and I guess I'll do so today), I think the fact that we only have this gap because nerve asked for it would preclude him from taking advantage of the courtesy by picking up prospect-eligible players in the interim.
pd
|
| 21 | Perm Dude
ID: 9211197
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 10:03
|
Here is a copy of the 2005 rule change regarding prospect eligibility vis-a-vis previously being on a regular season roster.
|
| 22 | Seattle Zen
ID: 29241823
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 10:34
|
As for the question of the thread, nerve is right, I think, in the interpretation... While we can come up with a specific rule banning the picking up of prospects before the prospect draft
I do not agree. That "specific rule" banning the picking up of prospects before the prospect draft has always been the rule and I remember chastising Pancho for picking up Pat Neshek last year and Bili for picking up Jason Kubel in a previous year as examples of breaking this very rule.
Sorry, Nerve, you should have drafted this youngster.
|
| 23 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 10:43
|
Wow PD thanks for the uncalled for insult..
There is this underhanded feel to the whole thing I'm getting, as though the short gap in time was asked for in order to take advantage of a loophole we tried to close by doing the drafts back-to-back.
PD there was nothing "underhanded" about it. Underhanded implies a deceitful purpose.
PD post 399 I'm hoping to start sometime next week. Too much of a gap and then you have managers picking up prospect-eligible players off the wire.
Nerve post 402 This has always been an option in the past and part of the fun of the "window".
How is that underhanded PD?
In post 414 I said Does waiting for Trees pick keep the league from clearing or can you start it up with one player short?
It would be nice to have a day or two to make moves before the prospect draft.
How could I be more clear then to say make some moves before the prospect draft.
why would I have been worried about making the moves before the draft if it didn't involve prospects?
So I don't know why you would accuse me of being "underhanded". Geez.
I mean I came right out and said I wanted a clarification of the rules because I am trying to pick up a prospect.
Now PD how is that UNDERHANDED? Which is to imply I was trying to be deceptive?
I understand if you want to blow through the prospect draft to prevent pick ups but please don't call me underhanded when I have been completely transparent.
This request It would be nice to have at least a few days or maybe a week to do a bit of research before we start.
was to give me time to decide if Rasmus, Maybin or Ellsbury were worth bringing up to my roster, not to be underhanded.
|
| 24 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 10:45
|
I do not agree. That "specific rule" banning the picking up of prospects before the prospect draft has always been the rule
Yet I've shown you in writing several contradictions of your premise and you've shown me nothing.
|
| 25 | Perm Dude
ID: 9211197
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 10:50
|
#23: I'm merely giving you my impressions here, nerve. You asked for a gap between the drafts and now you are asking about picking up prospects in that gap. Whether it was your intention pick up prospects before the draft or not, these two things make it all look in a bad light.
I'm not trying to insult anyone here. I'm merely saying that we only have the gap because you asked for it, otherwise this wouldn't come up. At best, this seems discourteous to me.
Zen: If you have a specific rule please point it out. I looked for it but couldn't find it. I'm not saying there isn't one, but I'm just not finding it.
|
| 26 | Myboyjack
ID: 44249198
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 10:51
|
nerve - the "writing" you've shown has been demonstrated to be unreliable.
|
| 27 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 11:05
|
How is it "a bad light and discourteous" when I clearly said for example on March 15th...
Punk We should probably lock all the teams until after the Prospect draft is complete so that doesn't happen.
Nerve Punk we don't lock the teams and in fact you will likely see a flurry of activity right after the 2 day waiting period, it's part of the fun of the league.
Everyone has an equal shot so it isn't really an issue.
Yes I did ask for a gap, and yes it was to pick up a prospect and I was completely transparent about it if you would read the posts.
I've just shown you 3 different times I made clear my intentions.
|
| 28 | biliruben
ID: 92181821
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 11:15
|
I can't remember the exact timing issues. Someone offer Toral a drink to adjudicate this. I am sure he remembers.
|
| 29 | Seattle Zen
ID: 29241823
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 11:25
|
Zen: If you have a specific rule please point it out. I looked for it but couldn't find it. I'm not saying there isn't one, but I'm just not finding it.
Perm - I'm sure you are well aware that not all of our rules are written down. Some of us just remember how things have worked in the past. As for writing down all the rules, that sounds like a great project. Are you going to do it or are you going to assign someone to do it?
Nerve - relying on posts from 4 or 5 seasons ago is "showing me something", I guess. What it is showing are some old discussions, but no longer the rule. It's unfortunate that we don't have a up-to-date code of rules, but the old discussions regarding the Prior Rule is an antiquated as the Dred Scott decision.
|
| 30 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 11:35
|
the old discussions regarding the Prior Rule is an antiquated as the Dred Scott decision.
OK Zen I'll have to take your word for it because I will be the first to admit I'm not the best at keeping up with all the variations over the years.
|
| 31 | Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 12:03
|
Ah, Nerve, I just love this league. Everyone is so reasonable and decent!
|
| 32 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 12:25
|
Everyone is so reasonable and decent!
Yeah especially PD who obviously wins the nice guy award as the most reasonable and mild mannered poster on the poli forum, but then he tosses me a knuckle ball I didn't even know he could throw and calls me underhanded.... it was worth it just for the pleasure of seeing PD mix it up a bit.
8-}
|
| 33 | Perm Dude
ID: 9211197
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 12:27
|
We need to get Obama in this league...
:)
|
| 34 | Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 12:55
|
Nah, let's invite Rev. Wright. I'll change the name of my squad to "The Man".
|
| 35 | Perm Dude
ID: 9211197
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 13:07
|
Cool! I'll be "White Man's Burden."
|
| 36 | tree on the treo
ID: 40842210
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 13:16
|
ill be the great leader or whatever nonsensical phrase boxman uses...
|
| 37 | Boldwin
ID: 3013265
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 16:04
|
Tell me there is no problem picking Parra and Towles, in the Yahoo database but prospect eligible.
|
| 38 | Perm Dude
ID: 9211197
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 16:06
|
One is always free to draft those players in the regular draft, so long as they are in Yahoo.
|
| 39 | Tree
ID: 3533298
Wed, Mar 19, 2008, 16:34
|
for as long as i've been in this league, you have been able to draft anyone in the regular draft, as long as they were in the yahoo database, whether they've played 0 games, 100 games, 1000 games, or whatever.
but once the regular draft ends, no one who is prospect eligible may be picked up as a free agent until AFTER the prospect draft.
this isn't anything new. this has been the rule for as long as i can remember.
|
| 40 | Boldwin
ID: 3013265
Thu, Mar 20, 2008, 04:58
|
My always fuzzy memory when it comes to legal fine print, can't keep straight the rule about not being able to prospect keeper roster anyone who has ever been picked up on a roster. Is that actually a rule and if it is how can we all be expected to live by it? I can't even remember picking up Soria myself let alone whether 150 other rookies have ever been picked up. Is even one person archiving the record of pickups from last year?
|
| 41 | Tree
ID: 45229204
Thu, Mar 20, 2008, 06:35
|
can't keep straight the rule about not being able to prospect keeper roster anyone who has ever been picked up on a roster. Is that actually a rule and if it is how can we all be expected to live by it?
record-keeping is why that rule was down away with. it was far too burdensome.
as long as a player maintains his prospect-eligibility, even if he played for all 14 teams in this league last year, he can still be drafted in the prospect draft.
|
| 42 | Perm Dude
ID: 1927207
Thu, Mar 20, 2008, 09:09
|
Soria was picked up by you, Baldwin, after being your prospect, but he was dropped and therefore you weren't able to keep him as a prospect. In he went undrafted (and unkept as a regular keeper by someone else) he could be drafted in the prospect draft again (by you even).
Once you call up a prospect, you can't send him down on your own prospect keeper list. But he can be re-drafted if not kept.
|
| 43 | Myboyjack
ID: 8216923
Thu, Mar 20, 2008, 17:45
|
My memory of the existing rule and my belief in what the correct rule going forward is exactly as stated by tree in post 39. We need to clarify this for posterity.....
|
| 44 | nerveclinic
ID: 105222
Thu, Mar 20, 2008, 18:28
|
Well if 39 is right it was voted on in one of the threads. I did a lot of digging and couldn't find anything different then what I posted.
If the rule was changed it's in writing somewhere in these threads.
|
| 45 | Tree
ID: 10292015
Thu, Mar 20, 2008, 18:30
|
Well if 39 is right it was voted on in one of the threads. I did a lot of digging and couldn't find anything different then what I posted.
see post 29.
|
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com |
|
|
Post a reply to this message: Urgent Baseball Rule Clarification Please Read
|